All 2 Debates between Lord Hill of Oareford and Lord Martin of Springburn

Further Education: 16 to 19 Year-olds

Debate between Lord Hill of Oareford and Lord Martin of Springburn
Wednesday 30th March 2011

(13 years, 7 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait Lord Hill of Oareford
- Hansard - -

I know that the noble Baroness and Peers on the opposition Benches are very concerned about education and training and have worked extremely hard to promote it over a long period and that she and others are particularly concerned about unemployment among the 16 to 18 age group. Fortunately, in the last quarter that has fallen a little, but we need to keep going on it. I understand entirely why the EMA was set up and what the moral purpose behind it was. It was paid to 45 per cent of children, which is hard to define as a targeted form of assistance. Overall we have moved from a situation where it was an incentive payment to one where participation up to age 18 is to be compulsory. As the participation age is raised going forward, the argument for a broad scheme like that is weaker. Therefore, it is sensible to concentrate the money that we can afford on those who need help the most.

Lord Martin of Springburn Portrait Lord Martin of Springburn
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, may I put it to the Minister that the apprenticeship schemes are very welcome? The young apprentices learn practical skills on the factory floor but they must learn the theory in vocational colleges. I hope that places are made available for apprentices in those colleges.

Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait Lord Hill of Oareford
- Hansard - -

I agree with that point. I would be very keen to have a conversation with the noble Lord about UTCs, which I hope will capture some of the issues about which he is concerned.

Apprenticeships

Debate between Lord Hill of Oareford and Lord Martin of Springburn
Wednesday 9th February 2011

(13 years, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait Lord Hill of Oareford
- Hansard - -

The difference between us is in essence a philosophical one. As I hope I have demonstrated, both sides of the House are committed to the idea of increasing the number of apprenticeships, their status and the esteem in which they are held. The difficulty with the previous approach of offering a guarantee is that, given that apprenticeships are employer-based, they are dependent on employers providing the place in work, which is not in the gift of government to control. Giving a guarantee on which one cannot deliver does not seem to me to be a guarantee.

Lord Martin of Springburn Portrait Lord Martin of Springburn
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I welcome what the Government are doing with regard to apprenticeships and giving young people a chance, but can steps be taken to contact self-employed journeymen and journeywomen— there are far more of them now than has ever been the case previously—to encourage them to take on apprentices? Small businesses and self-employed people are worried about the administration involved in apprenticeships. Can they be helped with the administration? Nothing beats a self-employed man or woman taking on an apprentice and becoming a mentor to him or her.

Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait Lord Hill of Oareford
- Hansard - -

I have huge sympathy with the noble Lord’s point and agree with him entirely. I am sure that we can do more. We are trying to establish a system across the country but journeymen face difficulties in this regard. I know of a local farrier in my village who wants to take on a young lad but it is not straightforward, so I very much take that point on board and will certainly look into it.